Biologist: Scientists have discovered

Answer choices

1. A

   Contradicted: no support provided6% picked this

   It is a claim for which no support is provided in the argument, and that is used to illustrate the conclusion of

   We can stop reading this after the 1st half. Any claim prefaced by "so" definitely had support provided. Why should we believe that [these fossilized bacteria had already had a long evolutionary history]? Because, they are quite complex. (It takes natural selection many, many generations of mutations and natural selection to create complex structures)

   6%
2. B

   Contradicted: no support provided23% picked this

   It is a claim for which no support is provided in the argument, and that is used to support a claim that in turn

   We can stop reading this after the 1st half (2nd half does seem legit, for what it's worth). Any claim prefaced by "so" definitely had support provided. Why should we believe that [these fossilized bacteria had already had a long evolutionary history]? Because, they are quite complex. (It takes natural selection many, many generations of mutations and natural selection to create complex structures)

   23%
3. C

   Correct59% picked this

   It is a claim for which some support is provided in the argument, and that itself is used to support another claim that in

   Why this is right

   This answer choice describes a sequence of four ideas. A claim supports OUR claim. Our claim supports some other intermediate conclusion, which supports the main conclusion. This is that chain of ideas in order: 1. The bacteria were quite complex so, 2. They already had a long evolutionary history 3.5 billion years ago so, 3. There was apparently already life on Earth soon after the planet formed (4.6 million years ago, when conditions were harsh) so, 4. Life may be able to arise under many harsh conditions.

   Skill tested: Role · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

   59%
4. D

   Bad 2nd Half8% picked this

   It is a claim for which some support is provided in the argument, and that itself is not used to support any

   There was support provided for our claim (after all, it's prefaced by "so"), but our claim was part of supporting the eventual conclusion that "life appeared on Earth soon after its formation". The author is thinking that in order for complex life to be found by 3.5 billion years ago, it would have needed to get started way before that. Like, if it takes 1 billion years of evolution to result in life forms as complex as that bacteria, then finding this bacteria existing 3.5 billion year ago, then apparently life started evolving at least 4.5 billion years ago. The author isn't being that specific, but this is the sort of thinking that's leading the author to conclude that life must have appeared soon after the planet's formation.

   8%
5. E

   Bad 2nd Half4% picked this

   It is a claim for which some support is provided in the argument, and that itself is used to support two distinct conclusions, neither

   This is similar to (C), only it's saying that the last two claims (the two conclusions supported by our claim) are not related to each other; they're distinct. But we know that claim 5 and claim 6 (the last two in the paragraph) are not distinct. They're connected. After all, the author tells us claim 5 and then says This suggests that to lead into claim 6.

   4%